Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 22 Jul 2002 15:23:40 +0200 (CEST) | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [patch] cli()/sti() cleanup, 2.5.27-A2 |
| |
On Mon, 22 Jul 2002, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > irq_off() > > irq_on() > > irq_save(flags) > > irq_save_off(flags) > > irq_restore(flags) > > I'd prefer the following: > > void irq_off(void); > void irq_on(void); > > flags_t irq_save(); /* the old irq_save_off() */ > void irq_restore(flags_t); > > void __irq_save(void); /* without saveing */ > > rational: proper function-like API (should be inlines), irq save > without disableing is very uncommon, better make the API symmetric.
i agree mostly, but i do not agree with __irq_save() and irq_save(). What's wrong with "flags_t irq_save_off()" - the name carries the proper meaning, and it also harmonizes with irq_off().
Ingo
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |